We performed a comparison between Bitbucket and GitHub based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Result: Based on the parameters we compared, GitHub comes out ahead of Bitbucket. Although both products have valuable features and can be estimated as high-end solutions, our reviewers found Bitbucket has a complicated deployment process.
"We can watch the newly implemented code. So it's quite nice to organize the teams to see what part of the work is done and what part of the code is already old or new. It is very good for that kind of management."
"The setup was okay, and it was well-integrated."
"Bitbucket has a pull request-based method, similar to Git's merge request feature."
"Bitbucket's most valuable feature is the web interface, which is useful compared to other tools, has a lot of features, and is intuitive."
"The product's initial setup phase experience was good."
"We use Bitbucket for Jira, Confluence, and Jenkins and we have an automation pipeline. Whenever the coaching is done in Bitbucket we run an automation pipeline from the build, create installations, and tests all in one pipeline. It is done automatically."
"This is a very dependable product that is easy to use and it has an excellent GUI interface."
"Bitbucket is significantly cheaper compared to GitHub and it provides on-premises hosting."
"I have found GitHub stable."
"The product has a very user-friendly interface and user-friendly security."
"I would rate the stability a ten out of ten."
"The versioning of the code and the tracking of changes are definitely some of my top features."
"A great feature is being able to have different repositories and different kinds of projects in a single solution at a single time. It's just a click away."
"The control is the most valuable feature as developers can work on a single code."
"We use GitHub as a repository."
"It has a lot of features from the code development perspective. You get a lot of features such as repo, commit, merge, and branch. You can play around and do things on the fly. It is easy and simple to deploy. It is also easier to use when working from home."
"I would like to see the integration with some of the cloud service providers improved."
"One of the areas the solution could improve on is when there is a merging conflict it is quite confusing. When I am having a merging conflict I get stuck on the page, then I need to search how to handle the particular problem. For example, finding what the commands are which can be used."
"Sometimes we struggle with searching on repositories. It is a bit challenging sometimes to pinpoint the code or repositories when just filtering by repositories."
"Could provide some default branching options for users to adopt."
"Bitbucket doesn't currently offer AI functionalities."
"It would be beneficial to have a straightforward mechanism for integrating the initial tasks defined in Bitbucket with Jira when the need arises."
"When users are given access for the first time, they should have some basic setups to help them specify their purposes."
"Fine tuning for procedures and features related to analytics and code validation is needed."
"GitHub's issue management could be improved a little from an organization standpoint. It would be helpful to have the ability to organize a work board or a backlog more comprehensively. For organizations migrating to GitHub from arbitrary systems, it's a little bit of a headache to move on to that system."
"This solution could be improved by offering crowd sourced support where we could ask questions to other users."
"GitHub could expand the limits of the free version."
"GitHub could improve by being more user-friendly."
"The development team pushes the code into a repository, and the CI/CD pipeline will perform the build. We need open-source libraries to perform the builds. It would be helpful to have the ability to link to open-source libraries like npm libraries. I don't know if GitHub Actions provides this. I would like to see that in GitHub Actions if they don't."
"GitHub could have better integration or capability with other solutions."
"While using the solution when merging two code branches the code becomes a bit messy. This should be improved in the future."
"It would be better if the amount of storage were increased."
Bitbucket is ranked 1st in Version Control with 42 reviews while GitHub is ranked 3rd in Version Control with 64 reviews. Bitbucket is rated 8.4, while GitHub is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Bitbucket writes "It's a good solution for storing code, but the usability and integration could be better". On the other hand, the top reviewer of GitHub writes "Beneficial version control and continuous integration, but guides would be helpful". Bitbucket is most compared with Bitbucket Server, AWS CodeCommit, Atlassian SourceTree, Liquibase and IBM Rational ClearCase, whereas GitHub is most compared with Snyk, AWS CodeCommit, Atlassian SourceTree, Fortify on Demand and Checkmarx One. See our Bitbucket vs. GitHub report.
See our list of best Version Control vendors.
We monitor all Version Control reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.